• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

China's Suppression of Falun Gong

logician

Well-Known Member
True repression caused by atheism would stifle all forms of religion for the express purpose of forcing people NOT to believe in ANY god, i.e. a purely apolitical motive . I believe this has been fairly rare in the course of history compared to other forms of religious oppression.
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
No, but it did mention "spirit of the universe." Sounds like a God to me.

I did a search and that came up negative. Maybe you can copy and paste for us. Thanx.

It's possible that the page was updated recently and no longer includes the phrase.

Or I'm getting my sources confused, as I looked at a couple other sites. I'll try to find it in a bit.
Well, I can't seem to find that exact phrase again. *grumbles*

However, the Wiki does mention that it's rooted in traditional Chinese mysticism, as well as:
According to Xu Jian, writing for the Journal of Asian Studies, the discourses on qigong theory broadly divide into "naturalist" and "supernaturalist" schools. The "naturalist" discourse involves scientific research on qigong and seeks to understand it within a modern, empirical, paradigmatic framework, while the "supernaturalist" discourse is situated within a revival of nationalistic traditional beliefs and values, and conceives qigong as psychosomatic and metaphysical. Xu says, "this discursive struggle has articulated itself as an intellectual debate and enlisted on both sides a host of well-known writers and scientists — so much so that a veritable corpus of literature on qigong resulted. [...] Each [discourse] strives to establish its own order of power and knowledge, its own 'truth' about the 'reality' of qigong, although they differ drastically in their explanation of many of its phenomena."[32]
....
The Chinese government has generally tried to encourage qigong as a science and discourage religious or supernatural elements.
That's not as plain as "spirit of the universe," but I think it's enough to cast doubt on the assertion that Falun Gong is atheistic.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Because you blame the worldview you dislike (Christianity) for the evils done in its name, while giving the worldview you favor (atheism) a pass on the same thing.
my emphasis

Has any evil been done in atheism's name? Or, to be more specific, is the oppression of the Falun Gong done in the name of atheism?

Once again, I think you are comparing apples to oranges.

I see the atrocities as the same thing: the inevitably tragic consequence of religious intolerance backed by political power. Now, I don't hold (a)religious beliefs responsible for such things. I just think that if you do, you should be consistent.

I agree. I just think you need an actual instance of atheism causing oppression before you can call it a double standard.
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Has any evil been done in atheism's name? Or, to be more specific, is the oppression of the Falun Gong done in the name of atheism?
Yes. Both in Russia and China, atheism is/ was being enforce. As the Wiki quote I posted upthread shows, the Chinese government has no problem with the atheistic version of Falun Gong, and even encourages it. This is a clear example of religious intolerance.

Once again, I think you are comparing apples to oranges.
I've explained my reasoning. Your turn. :) How is this anything other than religious intolerance?

I agree. I just think you need an actual instance of atheism causing oppression before you can call it a double standard.
Uncontested. I also happen to have one.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
I've explained my reasoning. Your turn. :) How is this anything other than religious intolerance?

Ok, let me try to re-word this:
The Church of England is the national religion of England. Should, then, any policy that England makes be ascribed as happening "in the name of the Church of England"?

I personally do not think so.

Unless, it occurred through an edict of the Church of England, or through its power, or in some way directly due to the influence of the Church of England, I don't think the policy can be ascribed to it.

Now, to use the popular examples of the Crusades and the Inquisition, these clearly happened directly through the power, influence, and blessing of the Church. Thus, I ascribe these evils to the Church. Does this mean I think Christians are all evil? No. Do I think that they have owned up to their past mistakes? Sure. I'm just acknowledging that they did happen, and they happened because of Christianity.

Now, fastforward to the Falun Gong. The oppression is occurring through the power, influence, and policy of the government. Atheism is a policy the government holds. Atheism is not the reason for the oppression, nor the force behind it. Thus, though there may be an indirect connection between atheism and the oppression, the line connecting the two is the Chinese government. Thus, it is the government I hold responsible for the oppression, and not atheism itself.

Does this make sense?
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Ok, let me try to re-word this:
The Church of England is the national religion of England. Should, then, any policy that England makes be ascribed as happening "in the name of the Church of England"?

I personally do not think so.
Neither do I, which is often the case with strawmen.

Now, to use the popular examples of the Crusades and the Inquisition, these clearly happened directly through the power, influence, and blessing of the Church. Thus, I ascribe these evils to the Church. Does this mean I think Christians are all evil? No. Do I think that they have owned up to their past mistakes? Sure. I'm just acknowledging that they did happen, and they happened because of Christianity.
Saying "they happened because of Christianity" is a vast oversimplification.

Now, fastforward to the Falun Gong. The oppression is occurring through the power, influence, and policy of the government. Atheism is a policy the government holds. Atheism is not the reason for the oppression, nor the force behind it. Thus, though there may be an indirect connection between atheism and the oppression, the line connecting the two is the Chinese government. Thus, it is the government I hold responsible for the oppression, and not atheism itself.

Does this make sense?
No. The Chinese government is attempting to force atheism on the populace, plain and simple.
 

dogsgod

Well-Known Member
Well, I can't seem to find that exact phrase again. *grumbles*

However, the Wiki does mention that it's rooted in traditional Chinese mysticism, as well as:
According to Xu Jian, writing for the Journal of Asian Studies, the discourses on qigong theory broadly divide into "naturalist" and "supernaturalist" schools. The "naturalist" discourse involves scientific research on qigong and seeks to understand it within a modern, empirical, paradigmatic framework, while the "supernaturalist" discourse is situated within a revival of nationalistic traditional beliefs and values, and conceives qigong as psychosomatic and metaphysical. Xu says, "this discursive struggle has articulated itself as an intellectual debate and enlisted on both sides a host of well-known writers and scientists — so much so that a veritable corpus of literature on qigong resulted. [...] Each [discourse] strives to establish its own order of power and knowledge, its own 'truth' about the 'reality' of qigong, although they differ drastically in their explanation of many of its phenomena."[32]
....
The Chinese government has generally tried to encourage qigong as a science and discourage religious or supernatural elements.
That's not as plain as "spirit of the universe," but I think it's enough to cast doubt on the assertion that Falun Gong is atheistic.

Why? The Falun Gong believe in the supernatural, just not in a god. Atheists can be as superstitious as the day is long, be religious, practice pseudo-science, believe in the supernatural, but they don't believe gods exist.
 

dogsgod

Well-Known Member
No. The Chinese government is attempting to force atheism on the populace, plain and simple.

What's the point of forcing atheism onto atheists? They already are atheistic. The members of the Falun Gong are spiritualists. They don't worship a god.
 

Buttons*

Glass half Panda'd
I don't know... I don't really care. Falun Gong is pretty bizarre, It's right up there with scientology.
 

dogsgod

Well-Known Member
In April 1999 over ten thousand Falun Gong practitioners gathered at Communist Party of China headquarters, Zhongnanhai, in a silent protest against beatings and arrests in Tianjin.[8][9][10] Two months later the People's Republic of China government, led by Jiang Zemin, banned the practice, began a crackdown, and started what Amnesty International described as a "massive propaganda campaign." wiki



THAT is why they are outlawed. They broke the rules by organizing a mass demonstration. It's not about WHAT they believe, it's about not breaking the rules.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_Gong#cite_note-heretical-10
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
Neither do I, which is often the case with strawmen
Storm, it's easy to call strawman when you don't like the implications of your own position. I honestly am not trying to make a strawman: this is how I see the logical path of your reasoning. Basically, as far as I can tell, you are claiming that if government A has religion B as their state religion, then any religious intolerance/persecution performed by that government is the fault of religion B (or, at least, religion B shares part of the blame).

Incidentally this is not what we are saying when we hold Christianity accountable for the Crusades or Inquisition. That is more along the lines of: Religious intolerance/persecution performed by Religion A, for whatever reason (ie, religious or political), is the fault of Religion A.

Saying "they happened because of Christianity" is a vast oversimplification.

I agree, particularly in the case of the Crusades. However, the Crusades, however political in nature they actually were, were launched by the head of the Church, were funded by the Church coffers, and were backed by the full political and spiritual power of the Church. I agree; the motive of the Crusades was not religious, however "evangelism" and "saving the Holy Land" were its motivators for the masses.

As far as the Inquisition, I'm really not sure how you can exonerate Catholicism on that one.

No. The Chinese government is attempting to force atheism on the populace, plain and simple.

We don't disagree here. We just disagree as to who to place the blame on. Personally, I blame the tool wielder, not the tool.
 
Last edited:

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
In April 1999 over ten thousand Falun Gong practitioners gathered at Communist Party of China headquarters, Zhongnanhai, in a silent protest against beatings and arrests in Tianjin.[8][9][10] Two months later the People's Republic of China government, led by Jiang Zemin, banned the practice, began a crackdown, and started what Amnesty International described as a "massive propaganda campaign." wiki



THAT is why they are outlawed. They broke the rules by organizing a mass demonstration. It's not about WHAT they believe, it's about not breaking the rules.

Unfortunately, that doesn't explain why they were being beated and arrested before the mass demonstration.
 

dogsgod

Well-Known Member
We don't disagree here. We just disagree as to who to place the blame on. Personally, I blame the tool wielder, not the tool.

I disagree. The people of China are atheists to begin with in that their religions don't revolve about a god. They are spiritualists. Their government may very well be oppressing religion for political reasons, but atheism plays no role in the matter.
 

dogsgod

Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, that doesn't explain why they were being beated and arrested before the mass demonstration.
Any gatherings may have caused that. Religions can organize, and it's the organization that cause members of the government to feel threatened. Religions have to be registered in China and have to follow the rules which the government enforces.
 

Falvlun

Earthbending Lemur
Premium Member
I disagree. The people of China are atheists to begin with in that their religions don't revolve about a god. They are spiritualists. Their government may very well be oppressing religion for political reasons, but atheism plays no role in the matter.
Actually, we are in agreeance then. I'm not going into the whole atheist vs spiritualist argument, but I agree that atheism should not be blamed for the oppression of the Falun Gong; the blame falls squarely on the Chinese government.

dogsgod said:
Any gatherings may have caused that. Religions can organize, and it's the organization that cause members of the government to feel threatened. Religions have to be registered in China and have to follow the rules which the government enforces.
Ok, that makes sense, then. I said all along that it was the power of religions that threatens authoritarian governments.
 

Storm

ThrUU the Looking Glass
Storm, it's easy to call strawman when you don't like the implications of your own position. I honestly am not trying to make a strawman: this is how I see the logical path of your reasoning. Basically, as far as I can tell, you are claiming that if government A has religion B as their state religion, then any religious intolerance/persecution performed by that government is the fault of religion B (or, at least, religion B shares part of the blame).
Then you still do not understand the nuances of my position.

As I have said several times, I do NOT blame atheism here. I simply think that people should be consistent in whether or not they blame the worldview for the actions of its adherents.

We don't disagree here. We just disagree as to who to place the blame on. Personally, I blame the tool wielder, not the tool.
We don't disagree on that, either. So why are you arguing with me? :confused:
 
Top